The communicative and pragmatic level of Dmitry Karamazov's linguistic personality

Dryakhlova Anastasiya Andreevna Teacher of School No. 56 Vladivostok 690014, Russia, Primorskii krai, g. Vladivostok, ul. Narodnyi Prospekt, 27A, kab. 44 i@ffsad.ru

Gun'ko Yuliya Aleksandrovna PhD in Philology Associate Professor of the Department of Russian as a Foreign Language at the Far Eastern Federal University 690922, Russia, Primorskii krai, g. Vladivostok, ul. P. Ayaks, 10, kafedra RKI gunko_juliya@mail.ru

The communicative and pragmatic level of the linguistic personalityDmitry Karamazov

1. Analysis of the YAL of the hero of the artwork

In this paper, based on the research of a number of authors ^{[2, 3, 12, 13, 16, 17]}, we consider the hero of F. Dostoevsky's novel Dmitry Karamazov as a separate linguistic personality ^{[6, 7, 11]} and investigate the communicative-pragmatic, that is, the highest level of linguistic in the classification of Y. N. Karaulov. the personality of the hero.

At the communicative-pragmatic level, the personal characteristics of the speaker appear most vividly. The units of the level are the communicative and activity needs that encourage the speaker to any communication. They enter into the relations set by the discourse among themselves ^{[12, 14, 15]}, forming at the same time a communicative network, that is, a complex and fairly stable network of communications in society.

In order to reconstruct the communicative network of the hero of the work of art by the continuous sampling method, we recorded all relevant full-fledged dialogues of Dmitry Karamazov with other actors, obtaining the entire set of texts generated and perceived by the hero and reflecting his ability to create and perceive them.

We subjected the block of Dmitry Karamazov's speech parts to a discursive analysis ^{[6, 12]}, relying on structural, linguoculturological and communicative approaches to the study of the text, that is, we analyzed the speaker's communicative activity.

During the analysis of the motivational level of YAL, the concepts of communicative goals, tasks and strategies are in the center of attention ^{[5, 10]}. Based on the analysis of the text of the work, namely the direct author's and indirect characteristics of the hero, and based on the idea that "the individualization of the speech of each native speaker is due to the influence of many factors, some of which are related to the communication situation, others – with the constant characteristics of a person, society and the language system" ^{[4, p. 56]} we have identified the key motives of Dmitry Karamazov's activity – love, honor and fear.

Analyzing the motives, we focus primarily on the feelings and emotions of the hero, because "emotions are a special, peculiar form of cognition and reflection of reality" and they are "connected with the needs of a person underlying the motives of his activity", and in a literary text all the variety of emotions with their development and changeability reflects the "inner world a character in various circumstances, in relationships with other characters" ^{[1, p. 106]}.

2. Factors that determined the dominant motives of Dmitry Karamazov's communicative activity

The key factors for understanding the motives of the YAL are the circumstances of the biography, as well as the peculiarities of the emotional state of the hero.

It is known from the text that Dmitry Karamazov was abandoned by his own parents from childhood and did not stay long in the same house and, moreover, in the same family, and before entering the service he lived with no less than four guardians, which, in our opinion, is an important psychological characteristic and explains the hero's desire to find love and his affection, his attitude towards Grushenka, his desire to get her and take her away: "Oh, he will immediately take her away as far as possible, <...> marry her there and settle with her incognito, <...>. Then, oh, then a whole new life will begin at once! He dreamed about this other, renewed and already "virtuous" life ("certainly, certainly virtuous") every minute and ecstatically." The above passage reflects Dmitry Karamazov's two main desires – unity with his beloved and the preservation of honor. But these desires almost always correlate with the fear of the impossibility of their realization: "It was clear that a person had reached the line, died and was looking for the last way out, and if he failed, then even now into the water."

In the course of the hero's communicative activity, conflicting motives manifest themselves to varying degrees and take out each other: the money stolen from the bride can be spent on escaping with Grushenka and finding love, but their use will mean loss of honor for the hero, and the return of money in turn means the loss of the beloved. Therefore, sometimes there are communicative situations in which one of the motives becomes less relevant than the other, and communicative goals are formed only by one of them: "Let it be better for me to go out in front of the murdered and robbed, a murderer and a thief, and in front of all people, and go to Siberia, than if Katya has the right to say, that I cheated on her, and stole money from her, and ran away with Grushenka's money to start a virtuous life! I can't do that!".

3. Analysis of Dmitry Karamazov's communication strategies and tactics

All the dialogues of Dmitry Karamazov selected by us are naturally divided into four communicative blocks with traceable communicative goals.

1) A meeting with his father at the elder Zosima, the purpose of which is to defend his rightness in disputes with his father: "Dmitry Fedorovich <...> thought that they wanted to scare him as an elder; but since he himself secretly reproached himself for many particularly harsh antics in a dispute with his father lately, then accepted the challenge." In connection with this goal, the hero tries to perform two tasks: to expose himself as a victim and to expose his father.  This communicative situation is characterized by the general tension of the situation. Dmitry is timid in front of the elder and feels awkward from the moment of his arrival: "He bowed deeply to him and asked for a blessing. The elder, standing up, blessed him; Dmitry Fedorovich respectfully kissed his hand and with unusual emotion, almost with irritation, said <...>."

2) The communicative situation of confession before Brother Alyosha is characterized by a high degree of trust between the participants of the dialogue, which, however, is rather a monologue, only occasionally interrupted by the interlocutor's remarks. Trust is a fundamental part of the speech genre of confession, and the desire to confess itself arises as a consequence of "committing an incorrect action", because of which "a person feels dissatisfaction, emotional instability, which eventually causes a desire to speak out, explain the reasons for the committed act, find understanding and approval of others" ^{[9, p. 13]}, therefore Dmitry's main goal in this communicative act is to speak out, inform his brother about his shameful actions and get a response. During his confession, the hero implements a narrative strategy, as well as strategies of self-presentation and repentance.

3) Communicative actions in the process of searching for money are regulated in order to convince the interlocutors to lend the money needed to return the stolen and escape with Grushenka. The communication block includes two full–fledged dialogues - with Samsonov and with Khokhlakova. Within the framework of the designated goal, it is necessary to perform two tasks – to win over the interlocutors, and also to ask for help so that the request is fulfilled. To do this, Dmitry Karamazov uses communicative strategies of self-presentation and requests.

4)    During the interrogation, the communicative goals of the YAL are justification before the investigators and preservation of dignity. Due to the specifics of the situation, the inconsistency of the linguistic personality under study is most clearly reflected in this communicative block. Dmitry's interlocutors in this case turn out to be the police officer and the prosecutor, with whom he is remotely familiar: "at the police officer's house, Mitya, at the beginning of his arrival to us, was received cordially, but then, <...> the police officer, meeting with him <...> frowned heavily and only out of politeness bowed <...> With he was even more distantly acquainted with the prosecutor, but sometimes he visited the prosecutor's wife <...> with the most respectful, however, visits." The main reason for Dmitry's anxiety and irritation during the interrogation, in our opinion, is a change in status in relation to interlocutors with whom he could previously feel on equal terms. The speaker's intentions in this communicative situation are also specific. On the one hand, he needs to clear himself of suspicion of the murder of his father, on the other hand, important information to protect against charges – stealing money from his wife – Dmitry's secret: "In the answer to the question: where did I get this money from, there is such a shame for me that even the murder and robbery of my father could not be compared with if I killed and robbed him. That's why I can't talk. I can't do it out of shame." To achieve communicative goals, taking into account the specifics of the communicative situation, we distinguish two pairs of contradictory communicative tasks: to tell the truth – to keep the secret of the appearance of money; to win over investigators – not to be humiliated. In the second pair of tasks, in our opinion, the contradiction arises only in the context of the linguistic personality under study, because the main instrument of self-favor for Dmitry is ingratiation, which by definition involves belittling oneself in front of the interlocutor. According to these tasks, Dmitry Karamazov's communicative and pragmatic behavior during interrogation develops within the framework of four main strategies: sincerity and self-presentation on the one hand, evasion of answers and discrediting of interlocutors on the other.

Examining the text of Dostoevsky's work, we found out that Dmitry Karamazov selectively resorts to six different strategies during all communicative acts, which, depending on the communication situation, are implemented in twenty-six speech tactics.

         The most widely presented strategy of self-presentation, to which the hero resorts in all the communicative blocks described in this article.

         So, for example, in a conversation with elder Zosima, Dmitry uses the tactics of self-justification: first he admits his wrongness and asks for forgiveness, and then continues the statement with an excuse, which is expressed in the use of a contrary union, but to attach a construction indicating the reason for his behavior: "Forgive me generously for making you wait so long. But the servant Smerdyakov, sent by my father, to my insistent question about the time, answered me <...> that it was appointed at one o'clock"; "Gentlemen, forgive my anger, but I had a presentiment that this treacherous old man had called all of you here for a scandal."

And during the interrogation, Dmitry Karamazov resorts to the tactics of regulating the distance. In one case, the hero uses verbs in the imperative mood, and if you focus your attention only on the lexical semantics of these verbs, it can be assumed that Dmitry accepts his dependent role in advance, but the semantics of the verb form, on the contrary, suggests that the speaker rather allows himself to perform these actions over himself, trying to maintain the status of the master of the situation and not the victims: "well, gentlemen, crush, execute, decide fate." Another statement already carries the meaning of compromise: the hero puts himself on the same level with the interlocutors, using the 1st person plural pronoun and giving all three (i.e. including himself) a positive assessment. In addition, the word mutual is used in the statement, which again assumes equality between all interlocutors: "The three of us are noble people here, and let everything be so with us on the mutual trust of educated and secular people connected by nobility and honor."

         The narrative strategy is implemented in the tactics of the ascertaining narrative, built on the alternate use of verbs in the past tense and in the present historical, as well as in the tactics of the accentuating narrative using introductory modal words and expressions and elliptical constructions with a null verb of speech-thinking activity.

         The strategy of the request is implemented by the hero, for example, in the tactics of pleading, which "involves a demonstration of weakness, helplessness, dependence" ^{[8, p. 91]}. So, for example, the hero in the first communicative course activates the attention and participation of the interlocutor with a question and talks about his hopeless situation: "After all, I'm gone now, what do you think?". Further, Dmitry gives a direct description of his situation, using an evaluative adjective in the superlative degree: "I imagine only that I am in the most desperate situation." The next move is to demonstrate a sense of powerlessness in relation to what is happening by using an expressive and evaluative metonymic expression, which the hero calls himself, and replacing the combination "help me" with "help her" (fate): "if you really follow my fate, then you will help her in her death." The use of this tactic, it seems to us, is aimed at evoking in the interlocutor a sense of responsibility towards a weaker person in relation to him.

Also, the hero implements the tactic of a direct request within the framework of the request strategy, while the very construction of the request is performed differently depending on the interlocutor. This is how the request looks in a conversation with Samsonov, before whom the hero is even shy, judging by his behavior: "would you, most noble Kuzma Kuzmich, take all my rights"; "we would have done this paper right now, and if it were possible, if only possible, then today in the morning … You'd give me that three thousand." Here the hero does not dare to insist and convince, so he uses the construction NOT + Vf + LI to express his desire, as well as the conditional SPP with predicates in the subjunctive mood in each part. Such formulations make it possible to reduce the categoricality of the statement and soften the request, which the interlocutor (Samsonov) may not like.

The situation is different in a conversation with Khokhlakova, where the hero feels more confident: "I came in despair ... in the last degree of despair to ask you for a loan of three thousand dollars, a loan, but under the right, under the surest pledge, madam, under the surest security." The degree of categoricality in the utterance becomes higher, since the hero uses a target SPP with an infinitive predicate in the subordinate part to express the request. In the part of the joint venture, joined with the help of the opposing union, but the hero seeks to anticipate and fend off the objections of the interlocutor (Dmitry promises to repay the debt even before Khokhlakova herself could ask about it).

It should be noted that neither in the first nor in the second dialogue the communicative goal was achieved, the hero failed to give sufficiently strong arguments and build dialogues in the most favorable way for him. At the same time, we add that both interlocutors had a pre-formed attitude towards Dmitry, which, due to his psychological and intellectual characteristics, he did not take into account in his communicative acts.

         Dmitry Karamazov resorts to the discrediting strategy in cases when it is necessary to change his status in relation to the interlocutor or adjust the impression made in comparison with a third person. So, speaking about the father, the hero uses the tactic of indirect insult: "The very fact that you dare to mention her is a disgrace for her"; "Why does such a man live!"; "is it still possible to allow him to dishonor the earth with himself," he looked around at everyone, pointing at the old man with his hand." In the implementation of the tactic of indirect insult, both the syntactic structure and the lexical content of its components are involved. The insult is based on a rhetorical exclamation with an interrogative pronominal adverb, in addition, Dmitry uses an explanatory SPP with an indicative pronoun as a subject and a nominal predicate with the meaning of quality in the main part and with an expressive and evaluative name of the opponent's action in the subordinate part.

         Also, one of the ways to implement the strategy of discrediting the interlocutors is the depreciation tactic used by the hero during the interrogation: "Eh, gentlemen, there would be no small things: how, when and why, and why there is so much money, and not so much, and all this nonsense"; "Don't give a damn about the pestle!"; "Gentlemen, it is literally impossible to talk to you"; "Yes, I see such dreams... and don't you want to write it down?". Dmitry tries to expose his interlocutors as non-professionals and uses evaluative vocabulary when denoting the actions of investigators, and also evaluates them as interlocutors using the phraseological combination "you can't talk to you." In addition, Dmitry uses the word spit in a colloquial sense to demonstrate his attitude to the questions of the investigators, and the rhetorical question in the last example contains a mockery.

         The last two strategies are implemented by the hero during the interrogation and conflict with each other.

The strategy of sincerity is necessary for the hero to emphatically demonstrate the truth of his words and is implemented in various tactics. So, Dmitry resorts to the tactics of justification: "Not guilty! I am not guilty of this blood! I am not guilty of my father 's blood… I wanted to kill, but I'm not guilty! Not me!"; "I not only wanted to, but could have killed, and even voluntarily dragged myself that I almost killed! But he didn't kill him, after all, my guardian angel saved me"; "Because I didn't kill, didn't kill, didn't kill! You hear, the prosecutor: he didn't kill!" Here the hero refuses to accuse through repeated denial of the act imputed to him, and also, emphasizing his honesty, Dmitry informs about the desire to kill his father, and with the help of a contrary alliance, but differentiates between possible and actual.

As part of the tactics of emphasized honesty, Dmitry Karamazov uses the course of concessions and frankly confesses to another crime, while denying the murder imposed on him: "Guilty of violence, guilty of severe beatings inflicted on the poor old man. <...> But he is not guilty of the murder of the old man's father"; "Not guilty! Guilty of another blood, the blood of another old man, but not my father. And I mourn! Killed, killed the old man, killed and defeated." As can be seen from the examples, in this case the hero also uses the conjunction but, establishing a contrary relationship between what he did and what he did not do. In general, during the interrogation, the hero tries to demonstrate sincerity with all his behavior and show that he is not afraid of punishment for an imperfect crime, so another move to implement the current tactics is to report unnecessary and damaging facts to his reputation: "that package with three thousand, which I knew he had under his pillow, prepared for Grushenka, I he considered it decidedly stolen from me, that's what, gentlemen, he considered his own, as well as my property"; "I'm not afraid of evidence and I speak for myself." Dmitry challenges the investigators and tries not to show his fear in front of them, metaphorically speaking about his situation: "I am a wolf, and you are hunters, well, poison the wolf."

In turn, implementing a strategy of evading answers, the hero uses the tactics of rejecting the question: "I positively refuse to say this, gentlemen! You see, not because I couldn't say <...>, but because I won't say that the principle here is: this is my private life, and I won't allow you to invade my private life"; "That's right: I won't say, gentlemen, you guessed it, you won't find out"; "I understand myself what kind the importance of the matter and what is the most important point here, but still I will not say."

Dmitry refuses to give out full information about himself, although he repeatedly points out the awareness of the danger of such a refusal. In the first remark, he also gives a justification for his silence. But during the interrogation, the hero's determination weakens, under pressure he begins to lose his confidence and eventually changes his mind: "Good! "I'll tell you my secret, I'll tell you where I got the money from!.. I will reveal the shame so as not to blame either you or myself later." At this moment, Dmitry Karamazov loses an important means of preserving his face and begins to feel hurt.

Conclusion

Dmitry Karamazov as a linguistic personality and, more broadly, personality in general is determined by the totality of events that formed his picture of the world and the type of speech behavior, so first of all we turned to the biography of the hero.

Comparing the circumstances of Dmitry's growing up and his actions throughout the novel, as well as analyzing the statements generated by the hero, we came to the conclusion that there are two main motives that affect the language activity of the hero. These motives include, firstly, Dmitry's need to avoid loneliness, the reason for which lies in the absence of maternal love in the hero's life, as well as in the constant change of families and homes. Secondly, it is the need to preserve honor and dignity, which, in our opinion, is also associated with frequent moves in childhood and the need to protect yourself, in addition, the concept of honor is important to Dmitry as an officer.

The means of all language levels – phonetic (exclamation), lexical, grammatical - participate in the implementation of the communicative strategies we have considered to some extent. First of all, the hero uses emotional and evaluative vocabulary, referring the assessment to himself, then to the interlocutor, then to the actions of the interlocutor. At the morphological level, the superlative forms of adjectives and adverbs are the means of evaluation. At the syntactic level, the actualization of the evaluative value is carried out by using the evaluative means in the position of the grammatical predicate.

Entering into disputes, Dmitry uses complex sentences with a contrary meaning to parry the interlocutor's remarks, with a causal meaning to insult the interlocutor through an assessment of his actions, with the meaning of a concession for self-justification. Dmitry also insults or accuses his interlocutors through rhetorical questions or exclamations with an interrogative adverb.

In general, Dmitry Karamazov's impulsivity and his inability to take into account all the circumstances of communication (the interlocutor's attitude towards him, his mood) do not allow him to achieve communicative goals, of which only two (to defend the truth in a dispute with his father and to speak out) are achieved. In other cases, the hero either makes a request to those who knowingly would not fulfill it, then overestimates the credibility of the interlocutors to himself, making impossible promises, then chooses an unprofitable strategy for evading answers, as well as tactics of emphasized honesty, giving investigators reasons not to trust him.

Such communicative behavior may be associated with the hero's concentration to a greater extent only on his thoughts and experiences, which, in turn, is most likely due to the circumstances of his life, because Dmitry was left to himself all his childhood, did not build strong ties with people around him, and if he did, then these connections soon broke off. Dmitry Karamazov simply does not possess or possesses to a small extent the skill of effective communication, which naturally requires orientation not only to himself, but also to the interlocutor.

In general, characterizing the speech features of Dmitry Karamazov, we can talk about the general maximalism of speech behavior. This manifests itself at different language levels:

1) phonetic: raised tone, screams;

2) lexical: the frequency of evaluative vocabulary;

3) morphological: the frequency of adjectives and adverbs in the superlative, the frequent use of verbs in the imperative mood (including in the function of asking, apologizing, attracting the attention of the listener), as well as verbs of the 1st person plural in the incentive function;

4) syntactic: repetitions at the level of sentence and text, metatextuality.